Aave is trading near $93, caught in a tightly coiled range as weakening momentum in the token intersects with a $71 million U.S. federal court dispute that continues to weigh on sentiment. The token is currently about 37% below its 200-day moving average, underscoring a sustained downtrend that has yet to fully stabilize. Momentum indicators remain subdued, with RSI in the mid-40s and a flattening MACD, pointing more toward consolidation than renewed downside acceleration. Price action has also tightened, with AAVE oscillating between roughly $91 and $95 in recent sessions, reflecting an ongoing balance between buyers and sellers. The combination of technical compression and legal uncertainty has created a split narrative for traders: short-term hesitation driven by frozen assets, and medium-term optimism fueled by accumulation signals and historically bullish mean-reversion patterns. At the center of the dispute, as reported by Cryptopolitan, Aave is asking a U.S. federal court to lift a freeze on roughly $71 million in ETH, arguing that the assets belong to protocol users. And not a suspected North Korean hacker. The funds remain locked on the Arbitrum network, forming the core of an increasingly complex legal battle. The dispute highlights growing tension between DeFi recovery efforts and creditors seeking to enforce longstanding judgments against North Korea. In a court filing dated May 4, 2026, Aave said the court-ordered freeze is blocking the return of assets recovered following the Kelp DAO rsETH token exploit. In the meantime, the company is demanding an immediate lifting of the freeze. If the freeze stays, it requires a minimum $300 million bond from the plaintiffs. “Since the exploit occurred, teams from the Aave Protocol community, the Arbitrum community, and others in the global DeFi community have been working tirelessly as part of an effort called ‘DeFi United’ to return the frozen assets and other value to those affected by the Aave Protocol incident,” said the memo. The circular continues to say that the teams aim to restore stability and security within the Aave Protocol and other protocols in the decentralized finance ecosystem, while ensuring that similar exploits do not occur again. Recent developments suggest that lawmakers are closer than ever to resolving those disputes. A bipartisan breakthrough on stablecoin yield restrictions has removed one of the biggest obstacles to progress, with negotiators now working on final language that would allow crypto rewards tied to user activity while limiting interest-like payments on idle balances. The Kelp DAO rsETH token exploit raises doubt over the blockchain technology This dispute originated from a cyber breach in April involving Kelp DAO, a prominent liquid restaking protocol on Ethereum . In this scenario, a hacker exploited a vulnerability in a cross-chain bridge connected to the rsETH token. Afterward, the hacker exploited Aave by using illicitly obtained assets as collateral to borrow roughly $230 million in ETH. Shortly after the incident, as previously reported by Cryptopolitan, the Arbitrum protocol seized 30,766 ETH, worth about $73 million. It then reserved the assets for recovery. Analysts say the initial expectation was for the recovered ETH—the first major batch post-hack—to be returned to the victims. Later, this endeavor evolved into “DeFi United” pending ETH unfreezing decisions and other protocol votes. Notably, DeFi United is an emergency coalition of major crypto protocols—including Aave, Lido, and EtherFi—formed in April 2026 to restore rsETH backing after a $292 million Kelp DAO exploit. In this case, the plaintiffs, who hold unpaid judgments against North Korea, indicated a high likelihood that the attacker is linked to the regime’s Lazarus Group. Based on their argument, the frozen assets should be considered North Korean property and seized. In their filing, the plaintiffs began by admitting that the accusations regarding North Korea could be valid. “However, AaveLLC strongly disagrees with the idea that these issues can be legally resolved by restraining and seizing assets belonging to innocent third parties—specifically, users of the Aave software protocol (the ‘Aave Protocol’), who are completely unrelated to any alleged wrongdoing and have no known ties to North Korea,” they said. Despite uncertainty regarding the culprit, the hack had immediate consequences. Panic withdrawals quickly drained key lending pools, leaving them with critically low balances. These sudden mass withdrawals left some users unable to withdraw their deposits. The filing noted that the funds were seized directly from Aave users. This statement challenges the claim that they are associated with any alleged wrongdoer. It also casts doubt on whether Arbitrum DAO qualifies as a legal entity. Meanwhile, Aave refused to be an official entity subject to the plaintiffs’ method of service. This claim could create legal hurdles. Can stolen crypto be recovered without harming innocent users? Aave argues that freezing the assets is not only a legal issue but is actively hindering recovery from the Kelp DAO exploit. At this point, the attorneys for the plaintiffs stated that the Restraining Notice against Arbitrum DAO was not intended to assist in recovering funds for Aave Protocol victims; rather, they noted, it served the opposite purpose. In a statement, the founder and CEO of Aave, Stani Kulechov, stated that, “A thief does not own what he steals.” He compared the situation to a thief stealing diamonds, to have them snatched back. “These funds belong to the affected users they were stolen from — end of story,” he said. Don’t just read crypto news. Understand it. Subscribe to our newsletter. It's free .
